Punjab-Haryana High Court
Harpreet Singh vs State Of Punjab And Anr on 31 March, 2022
CRM-M-8909-2018 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-8909-2018
Date of Decision: 31.03.2022
HARPREET SINGH ... PETITIONER
VS.
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR .. RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK PURI
Present : Ms. Satwant Mehta, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Sidakmeet Singh Sandhu, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Saksham, Advocate for
Mr. Jasmandeep, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
*****
VIVEK PURI, J.(ORAL)
Petitioner has approached this Court by way of instant petition
under Section 482 Cr.P.C. invoking its inherent jurisdiction for quashing of
FIR No.75 dated 26.12.2016 under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC registered at
Police Station Women, District Amritsar on the basis of compromise.
On 05.03.2020, the parties were directed to get their statements
recorded before the learned trial Court/ Illaqa Magistrate.
In compliance of the order dated 05.03.2020, the statements of the
parties have been recorded and the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class,
Gurugram has sent the report and the relevant portion whereof is reproduced
here-in-below:-
"1.There is only one accused namely Harpreet
Singh arrayed in the FIR as per the statement of
Investigating Officer.
2. He is not proclaimed offender as per the statement
of the Investigating Officer.
3. The challan has not been presented in the present
1 of 3
FIR.
4. The compromise is genuine, voluntarily made,
without any threat, coercion and out of free will of
the parties."
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that marriage of
petitioner with respondent No.2 has been dissolved by a decree of divorce by
mutual consent under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act in terms of
judgment and decree dated 09.08.2018. The amount of permanent alimony has
been paid to respondent No.2.
Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has not disputed the
aforesaid factual aspect(s) and has stated that he has no objection if the FIR is
quashed.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through
the record of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case
for exercising the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.,
so as to secure the ends of justice because the parties have arrived at a
settlement, out of the Court, by way of compromise. The compromise is
without any pressure and a genuine one. In such a situation, continuation of the
prosecution would result in sheer abuse of process of law.
The controversy in the instant case does not indicate that the same
involves heinous or serious offences and furthermore, the matrimonial dispute
has been sought to be amicably settled. Consequently, a deserving case is made
out where the court should exercise the power to secure the ends of justice.
For the aforesaid view, this Court finds support from Kulwinder
Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal)
1052, upheld by Hon'ble Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and
others (2012) 10 SCC 303.
2 of 3
Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case noted
above, coupled with the reasons aforementioned and to secure the ends of
justice, FIR No.75 dated 26.12.2016 under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC
registered at Police Station Women, District Amritsar and all the subsequent
proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise are ordered to be
quashed, however, qua the petitioner only.
Resultantly, with the above-said observations made, the instant
petition stands allowed.
31.03.2022 (VIVEK PURI)
smriti JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether Reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
